Imperial City - DLC?
Maintenance for the week of March 24:
· [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 24, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC)
· Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
· Playstation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 24, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC)
· Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
· Playstation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – March 26, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
-
Perphection✭✭✭✭Why is Perphection so upset?
I'm not upset.
Everyone in this thread just seems to be under the impression that getting players back will be easy, or that they will gladly buy PvP content. Yeah, some people will come back and buy the DLC, a majority however, will not.
I'm more concerned about having a thriving PvP scene again, and ways that they could potentially make that happen.
ZOS sending out a massive E-mail saying:
"Come back we dropped subscription fees!! But you have to pay us for the PvP update."
Doesn't seem like a very promising solution to revitalizing PvP.0 -
LonePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Okay let's look at it this way.
If they never went B2P you would have to pay 15$ a month to play the imperial city.
Now that they are going B2P you can pay 15$ a month to play the imperial city like the first example. Or you could purchase the imperial city as a DLC and play it for as long as you live.
What seems to be the problem here exactly?
These sorts of level-headed responses are not conducive to our efforts to rally angry citizens carrying torches and pitchforks.
1 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭LonePirate wrote: »
These sorts of level-headed responses are not conducive to our efforts to rally angry citizens carrying torches and pitchforks.
These sort of "level-headed responses", are made under the assumption that players will return, and be willing to drop more money on a game that has previously let them down. If it hadn't they would still be playing.0 -
Perphection wrote: »
Oh my, you're missing the point again. It's the "IF", they sub that matters.
You said it yourself very, very clear..These are your words not mine.
"if they choose not to sub then they don't play any new content, nothing has changed"
Exactly my point, nothing has changed. If nothing has changed why would they sub or buy DLC's?
Uhhhh maybe because the DLC will add new content ? I thought that was common knowledge
0 -
Okay let's look at it this way.
If they never went B2P you would have to pay 15$ a month to play the imperial city.
Now that they are going B2P you can pay 15$ a month to play the imperial city like the first example. Or you could purchase the imperial city as a DLC and play it for as long as you live.
What seems to be the problem here exactly?
I know sypher he just doesn't seem to get it, that is what I told him in the beginning of the thread. I am just going to stop beating this dead horse.0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »
Uhhhh maybe because the DLC will add new content ? I thought that was common knowledge
Again, as previously stated maybe 5 times now? ZOS doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to patches and updates. Do you not remember the mass exodus which was the 'Lighting Patch'.
Which again, is why Imperial City needs to be a gesture of good faith. ZOS needs to work on redeeming themselves, show players who have quit as well as the rest of us that you're improving and that you actually can add quality content. Then, if people believe in ZOS they will gladly buy future DLC's.0 -
Perphection wrote: »
These sort of "level-headed responses", are made under the assumption that players will return, and be willing to drop more money on a game that has previously let them down. If it hadn't they would still be playing.
So what does that have to do if it's B2P or sub based ? It's still the same game....wait a minute.....I caught you sneaky devil....what you want is free to play, because that is what your argument is point towards0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »
I know sypher he just doesn't seem to get it, that is what I told him in the beginning of the thread. I am just going to stop beating this dead horse.
It's you who doesn't seem to get it, you're one of the people who are satisfied with this game. It's not about you, it's not about current subscribers. It's about bringing back the hundreds of thousands of players who quit.0 -
Perphection wrote: »
Again, as previously stated maybe 5 times now? ZOS doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to patches and updates. Do you not remember the mass exodus which was the 'Lighting Patch'.
Which again, is why Imperial City needs to be a gesture of good faith. ZOS needs to work on redeeming themselves, show players who have quit as well as the rest of us that you're improving and that you actually can add quality content. Then, if people believe in ZOS they will gladly buy future DLC's.
Sounds like you have issues with ZoS....again what does B2P or sub matter in this situation ? Would you have liked it better if ZoS just invited everyone back to play for free ?0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »
So what does that have to do if it's B2P or sub based ? It's still the same game....wait a minute.....I caught you sneaky devil....what you want is free to play, because that is what your argument is point towards
Not at all, I've remained a subscriber since launch. I would prefer that it remained subscription based TBH, but the population suffered because the game was unfinished. Again, it's about revitalizing a dying game. This is not about me, nor about current subscribers it's about those who have quit.0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »
Sounds like you have issues with ZoS....again what does B2P or sub matter in this situation ? Would you have liked it better if ZoS just invited everyone back to play for free ?
That's exactly what ZOS is doing... They're inviting everyone back to play for free.
However, if they want to keep those people playing the game, they need to show them improvements, they need to convince them buying DLC's is worthwhile, and again given their track record you'd have to be crazy to have faith that ZOS can deliver quality content.0 -
Bouvin✭✭✭✭✭
✭Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »
Just pay the sub like we have been and everything is included.....nothing is really different to be honest. So if they were planning on coming back for imperial city they would have to had to resub anyways, this way when imperial city does launch they can chose to sub and get all the content or they can just buy said imperial city DLC if that's all they are interested in
Right.
Just keep paying and pretend they didn't withhold IC for the last 5 months so they could nickel and dime people for it as DLC.
Fact is, they promised 4-6 week content updates and in the last year we've gotten Craglorn and More (upper) Craglorn.
Not exactly the 4-6 week content update schedule we were tricked into believing when we signed up to pay a monthly subscription now is it?
Also, instead of keeping up with this schedule they've been devoting resources to developing the cash shop...using our subscription dollars to do so.
So, keep calm and continue giving ZOS your money isn't exactly what people want to hear right now.0 -
Fruitdog✭✭✭✭
Unfortunately I don't think the Imperial City will have much impact on PvP since it sounds like another PvE zone.Perphection wrote: »I'm more concerned about having a thriving PvP scene again, and ways that they could potentially make that happen.
0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭
Right.
Just keep paying and pretend they didn't withhold IC for the last 5 months so they could nickel and dime people for it as DLC.
Fact is, they promised 4-6 week content updates and in the last year we've gotten Craglorn and More (upper) Craglorn.
Not exactly the 4-6 week content update schedule we were tricked into believing when we signed up to pay a monthly subscription now is it?
Also, instead of keeping up with this schedule they've been devoting resources to developing the cash shop...using our subscription dollars to do so.
So, keep calm and continue giving ZOS your money isn't exactly what people want to hear right now.
Finally someone who doesn't just blindly support ZOS. Thank you for using the glorious brain of yours.1 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Unfortunately I don't think the Imperial City will have much impact on PvP since it sounds like another PvE zone.
Imperial City could have a monumental impact on PvP! They said they were trying to base it off "Darkness Falls", from DAOC. If that is the case, the access to the Dungeons and content is based off of PvP. The realm "winning", the war has control over that territory.
This means that PvE players would partake in PvP, and see merit in Cyrodiil.Edited by Perphection on January 22, 2015 11:14PM1 -
Perphection wrote: »
That's exactly what ZOS is doing... They're inviting everyone back to play for free.
However, if they want to keep those people playing the game, they need to show them improvements, they need to convince them buying DLC's is worthwhile, and again given their track record you'd have to be crazy to have faith that ZOS can deliver quality content.
They are showing all those returning player improvements. The most massive one we have ever seen. 1.6 my friend is ESO 2.0. So if 1.6 turns out to be as great as we hope it is,to be that will be all the "good faith" they need to decide of they want to continue with the game and sub or just play for free and purchase DLC that they choose.0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭You're aware that this post is in the "Alliance War" right? This thread is 100% focused on PvP. I've never done Trials, Dungeons, Craglorn stuff, I don't even know what it's called, nor do I care.
1.6, and the updates to bring players back to this game leave out PvP. PvP, is what needs to be revitalized. If you're a PvE player, the games population means little to nothing to you. The games population has no effect on your overall experience.
Again, this is regarding PvP and why Imperial City needs to be included, and not DLC content.0 -
Bouvin✭✭✭✭✭
✭Perphection wrote: »
Imperial City could have a monumental impact on PvP! They said they were trying to base it off "Darkness Falls", from DAOC. If that is the case, the access to the Dungeons and content is based off of PvP. The realm "winning", the war has control over that territory.
This means that PvE players would partake in PvP, and see merit in Cyrodiil.
LoTRO tried this "Winning Faction gets dungeons in the PvP zone" stuff.
The dungeon was completely dead after about 2 months.0 -
Pancake-Tragedy✭✭✭✭✭
LoTRO tried this "Winning Faction gets dungeons in the PvP zone" stuff.
The dungeon was completely dead after about 2 months.
Yep. Attaching PvE content to PvP and calling it PvP content isn't PvP content.Pancake Tragedy - Sorcerer0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Pancake-Tragedy wrote: »
Yep. Attaching PvE content to PvP and calling it PvP content isn't PvP content.
You're just dying for my attention aren't you? It's cute.
Creating reason, and purpose for PvP facilitates PvP. Currently, there is no real purpose other then Emperor. The PvP gear isn't worth grinding for, and most of us who PvP frequently have Millions of AP with nothing worthwhile to spend it on.
Imperial City, *could, give PvP a greater purpose and incentive to play.0 -
Pancake-Tragedy✭✭✭✭✭Perphection wrote: »
You're just dying for my attention aren't you? It's cute.
Creating reason, and purpose for PvP facilitates PvP. Currently, there is no real purpose other then Emperor. The PvP gear isn't worth grinding for, and most of us who PvP frequently have Millions of AP with nothing worthwhile to spend it on.
Imperial City, *could, give PvP a greater purpose and incentive to play.
Isn't that what the PvP buffs are used for? To promote PvE players to PvP so that they get those buffs? How well is that working now?Pancake Tragedy - Sorcerer0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭PvE players used to fight very hard to protect their buff servers. Or do you not PvP enough to remember that?0
-
Perphection wrote: »You're aware that this post is in the "Alliance War" right? This thread is 100% focused on PvP. I've never done Trials, Dungeons, Craglorn stuff, I don't even know what it's called, nor do I care.
1.6, and the updates to bring players back to this game leave out PvP. PvP, is what needs to be revitalized. If you're a PvE player, the games population means little to nothing to you. The games population has no effect on your overall experience.
Again, this is regarding PvP and why Imperial City needs to be included, and not DLC content.
Again wrong population does matter to the pve crowd, just look at the leaderboard system. With out a population there is no one to compete with, people will have fewer players to run said dungeons or trials with. 1.6 will completely change the pvp meta in cyrodil. It will not add anything new to cyrodil but it affects PVE just as much as it does PVP. What your suggesting is that the imperial city be free which is completely unrealistic. Whether the game stays sub based or is B2P with DLC transaction the cost of playing said content does not change. So all your really arguing is that ZoS should hand out imperial city free because you feel slightedEdited by Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO on January 23, 2015 1:26AM0 -
Perphection wrote: »PvE players used to fight very hard to protect their buff servers. Or do you not PvP enough to remember that?
They still do.....azure star....chill rend0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »
They still do.....azure star....chill rend
You're aware that you, with this statement, are supporting my argument now yes?
To clarify, I'm addressing a concern another guy had that PvE and PvP do not influence one another. And how Imperial City will help the overall PvP situation.0 -
Poxheart✭✭✭✭✭No matter how many new and/or returning players there are when this game goes B2P, there will be a steep population decline after a month or two. People will burn through new content in a week, get bored, and then stop playing. That's the nature of MMOs these days.
This applies to PvP population, too.Unsubbed and no longer playing, but still checking the Alliance War forum for the lulz.
Pox Dragon Knight
Poxheart Nightblade
The Murder Hobo Dragon Knight - Blackwater Blade
Knights of the WhiteWolf0 -
Perphection✭✭✭✭No matter how many new and/or returning players there are when this game goes B2P, there will be a steep population decline after a month or two. People will burn through new content in a week, get bored, and then stop playing. That's the nature of MMOs these days.
This applies to PvP population, too.
That's why earlier I stated that PvP, is essential end game. It's repeatable content, that is completely dependent upon the population. I absolutely agree that the population will die back down after a few months, but the best we can hope for is that people want to stay.
Which is exactly why the Imperial City should be included, and not DLC. Let the returning players have this new content to bring them back in, and if they stay they'll be more likely to buy future DLC's, and even subscribe again.0 -
Cogo✭✭✭✭✭
✭Cheese? No?Oghur Hatemachine, Guild leader of The Nephilim - EU Megaserver
Orc Weapon Specialist and Warchief of the Ebonheart Pact - Trueflame Cyrodiil War Campaign
Guildsite: The Nephilim
"I don't agree with what you are saying, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"
-Voltaire
"My build? Improvise, overcome and adapt!"0 -
Xsorus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭This thread...
/facepalmEdited by Xsorus on January 23, 2015 6:03AMhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXpX7JMwRXtczc5GTrIYRIw
ESO and GW2 PvP videos0 -
Lava_Croft✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Who cares about the PvE component? The Imperial City will also include ESO's equivalent of DAoC's Darkness Falls!Pancake-Tragedy wrote: »Edit: The way the IC was advertised makes it sound as if it is a PvE zone that is in Cyrodiil anyways...
Edited by Lava_Croft on January 23, 2015 6:15AM0